From BBC page: "...Senna was unquestionably the better driver during their years at McLaren...".
It's a joke, isn't it? What a very inaccurate and biased statement. As a matter of fact, Prost outscored Senna in both seasons. In 1989 Prost won championship by huge margin (and he drove only 15 gp, compared to senna 16). 1988 was the first and only year that the championship winner had not scored the most points overall (counting all 16 races).

I'd expect something a good deal more independent from the BBC, I wonder if this whole exercise is what is known in the industry as 'an advanced media deliverable' = 'hype vehicle' ahead of a screening of 'Senna' the documentary in the near future ?

From BBC page: "...Senna was unquestionably the better driver during their years at McLaren...".

A common misconception with those two, but as most of us know, "faster" isn't the same thing as "better", just as a fast driver isn't necessarily great, and a great driver may not be the fastest, but popular polls on this kind almost always ignore those considerations. Over a single lap, we'd probably all put our money on Senna, but over a season or even a single race with things like track conditions, fuel load, tyre life, passing without crashing etc to be taken into consideration, the cleverer or more complete driver would be the one to back, not necessarily the fastest. I suppose it all depends on how you want to define "better", but even limiting ourselves to their McLaren era, Alain P would get my vote every time.

No analysis of Clark's style (apart from saying he was "smooth" - well, no sh*t, Sherlock!), strengths or weaknesses.

Not even a mention of his drive at Monza in 68 (assisted by Hill's retirement) which was nothing short of phenomenal (even in a Lotus 49).

Just a few anecdotes and focus on his death. And even that fails to mention the likeliest cause of the crash.

Remind me why we have a licence fee again? Is BBC F1 "journalism" simply a job-creation programme for the irredeemably stupid? Is it asking too much for someone with a working knowledge of the sport and its history to be given the job of Chief F1 Writer in place of the village idiot who currently holds it?

And why am I even getting angry about this idiotic, childish "poll" which proves nothing and furthers our knowledge not one jot?

On any poll of "The greatest Formula 1 Driver" I always like to confuse the issue by asking "Where's Tazio Nuvolari?" and then explaining that he did drive in one Formula 1 race, admittedly pre-championship.

How did Fangio rate Moss? Did his opinion through his post retirement years change as other legends came and went on the scene? Or was he ever even asked who he rated? He lived a good 30+ years past his retirement from GP's so he must have been asked at some point...

My apologies: I've been away, and had forgotten to tick the option 'track this topic' so have only just seen your very kind remark and your pertinent question.

In his forward to (I think it is) My Cars, My Career (but it might be the Edwards biography - all my books are still packed away during the Great Office Rebuild ordered by Mrs M) Fangio says of Moss (IIRC - I think I have it right) 'all of my rivals, you were the one I feared and respected most'.

I do not know directly what else Fangio might have said of Moss but I believe it is well asccepted that he regarded him as someone very special. There was a Grand Prix (I can't remember exactly which) where Moss led all the way despite Fangio's best efforts only to suffer mechanical failure a couple of laps from the end, letting Fangio through to win. When Moss went up to congratulate him at the end of the race, Fangio handed Moss the wreath and said 'you were the moral victor'.

... There was a Grand Prix (I can't remember exactly which) where Moss led all the way despite Fangio's best efforts only to suffer mechanical failure a couple of laps from the end, letting Fangio through to win. When Moss went up to congratulate him at the end of the race, Fangio handed Moss the wreath and said 'you were the moral victor'.

My apologies: I've been away, and had forgotten to tick the option 'track this topic' so have only just seen your very kind remark and your pertinent question.

In his forward to (I think it is) My Cars, My Career (but it might be the Edwards biography - all my books are still packed away during the Great Office Rebuild ordered by Mrs M) Fangio says of Moss (IIRC - I think I have it right) 'all of my rivals, you were the one I feared and respected most'.

I do not know directly what else Fangio might have said of Moss but I believe it is well asccepted that he regarded him as someone very special. There was a Grand Prix (I can't remember exactly which) where Moss led all the way despite Fangio's best efforts only to suffer mechanical failure a couple of laps from the end, letting Fangio through to win. When Moss went up to congratulate him at the end of the race, Fangio handed Moss the wreath and said 'you were the moral victor'.

Yes it is the forward to My Cars, My Career.

Amongst other things, JMF writes: "Many times I am asked who I considered the most talented racing drivers of my time and I always think of you and Ascari - two people with the same kind of temperament . But whilst Alberto gave much importance to qualifying, reaching the [first] corner and and taking the lead, so that he was always way ahead of the other, you did not have such a rigid approach, but became a fighter who knew how to take the lead, even when all seemed lost."and he concludesthe forward by saying"~ You never won the Championship, but it is not without reason that they call you 'The Champoin without a crown' "

I am certain the "moral victor" incident was at Monza in 1954. Stirling alludes to it in My Cars my Career saying no more than "Fangio - as the great sportsman he was - greeted me as the moral victor, and Pirelli even paid me a winner's bonus". Robert edwards writes"~ Fangio, who won the Italian race, gave Stirling the moral victory and so din most of the spectators." In All My Races, the 'moral victory' gets no mention but he (or Alan henry) devotes a paragraph to the Pirelli bonus saying they contacted him after the race to tell him they were paying the bonus. Gerald Donaldson in Fangio The Life Behind the Legend writes "Following the podium ceremonies, the victor sought out the gallant Moss and embraced him warmly. Though somewhat embarassed at the Latin show of affection, Moss was thrilled when Fangio told him he was the moral victor and that he had clearly arrived."

I guess anything which put a relatively recent driver over 60s gods like Clark was always going to rankle.Neither era has a better claim but there is always the suspicion that the drivers (or writers. or rock stars . or films ) which are the most present in the public pysche will prevail. I tend only to decide on my own lists by very subjective means- who I have seen in action- preferably live. And Senna would comfortably top that list ; he wouldn't be my favourite(or more accurately the driver who I most respected ) - Lauda is - but I have never seen anybody drive like Senna did - his speed was breathtaking. The reality is that if you put a Vettel and a Moss , a Nuvolari and a Prost in the same cars there'd be very little in it. And I certainly don't buy the nostalgic stuff that because Clark et al raced in lots of formulae and classes in one season that makes them better- the opportunity was there because of how the sport then worked. But now we have 19 - is it - GPs in places we have never heard of there isn't that opportunity. The irony for me is that Moss wasn't born 10-15 years later becuase few . if any drivers have been quite as commercially focussed .

It is an interesting side effect of modern regulations that we now have the curious situation that the very best in our field now do less than they have ever done. From the lowest fomulae (where testing can be free) up through the ranks with mandated testing only, to Formula One where today the ability to actually drive your car is so increasingly restricted, the amount of actual driving reduces, not only by race and testing dates but also by engine and gearbox mileage limitations. A tennis player, a golfer, a swimmer can all exercise their particular sporting prowess more the higher the pyramid they climb - it seems odd that in our field the reward for excellence is the withdrawal of the chance to do the thing you are best at!

It is an interesting side effect of modern regulations that we now have the curious situation that the very best in our field now do less than they have ever done. From the lowest fomulae (where testing can be free) up through the ranks with mandated testing only, to Formula One where today the ability to actually drive your car is so increasingly restricted, the amount of actual driving reduces, not only by race and testing dates but also by engine and gearbox mileage limitations. A tennis player, a golfer, a swimmer can all exercise their particular sporting prowess more the higher the pyramid they climb - it seems odd that in our field the reward for excellence is the withdrawal of the chance to do the thing you are best at!

Yes, proof, if proof were needed, that any sporting pretensions have been hi-jacked at the highest level by individuals & organisations who have their vested interests uppermost. It has come about because people in the 'lower' echelons have no power to have a say or resist & the organisations that do have some weight, seem to be run by cowards who are afraid to try & break the bonds.For all the corruption that allegedlly goes on in football & other sports, these sports do seem to support all their levels.

There are certainly a few debatable aspects of the list, such as Mansell being above Piquet, and Hamilton being above Brabham.

And I don't think Schumacher or Vettel should be in the top 10 even if, in the case of the latter, you'd probably have to add the word 'yet'...

But, at the risk of going against the grain, the rest of the top 10 is not a million miles away. The exact order might not be to everyone's tastes, but you'd have to admit that Senna, Fangio, Clark, Stewart, Prost, Lauda, Moss and Alonso should all be in there somewhere.

One problem with compiling a list is that people are fond of overlooking the obvious choices in favour of less well-known options as a way of attempting to display their depth of knowledge.

Another long-standing personal irritation is the way folk dismiss a controversial selection or inaccuracy as being the work of clueless youngsters. Poor fact-checking is undoubtedly annoying, but in my experience older people are more than capable of making the occasional slip as well.

The last time I checked, there were no 'teenagers' on the BBC F1 team.

Vettel not (yet) top ten, I can agree, but why not Schumacher? Leaving aside his questionable driving tactics (and I'm certainly not a fan of the chinned one), he should be number one, all things considered, shouldn't he? Senna was as bad as the Shoe when it came to driving standards, and he was far less successful. Yet he IS #1!